I just got around to reading a study published a few years ago about the usefulness of PSA screening. Basically doing the surgery did not significantly improve mortality or morbidity.
As far as dietary treatment of solid tumor cancer, I’ve seen and known many people over the years that have tried holistic and or chemo, basically if the surgeon can’t cut it out, the prognosis isn’t good. Let me modify that, I have seen a number of women that had positive nodes survive long term after mastectomy and radiation with the radiation probably killing some residual cancer in the lymph nodes.
As far as metabolically starving a cancer cell, I think brain cells are probably more sensitive than cancer cells to low blood sugar so I’m not sure you could eradicate the cancer without gorking yourself in the process.
I’m about two years out from cancer myself. I went with radical surgery and no chemo. Chemo would have reduced my chance of recurrence by about 20% but absolute risk reduction was really about 2% and my chances of permanent nerve damage and or death from treatment was probably higher than that with a 100% risk of being miserable for 6-9 months. So far so good.
> ... brain cells are probably more sensitive than
> cancer cells to low blood sugar so I’m not sure
> you could eradicate the cancer without gorking
> yourself in the process.
It is a common and pervasive myth that brain cells run only on glucose. They run on it only because 99% of current populations are on full-time glycemic diets, with the blood glucose being metabolized from carbs primarily, if not actually ingested as glucose (table sugar is 50% glucose).
Humans are capable of an alternate metabolism (nutritional ketosis, NK) in which most cells run on fat, and brain cells run on ketone bodies metabolized from fat. Some isolated human cultures (Inuit, Masai) live in NK most of the time. Many individuals elsewhere have chosen to.
I eat few enough carbs that I probably am at least part-time ketotic, but haven’t bothered to invest in the measuring equipment. Anyone on a low carb diet that is less than 50 grams net carbs per day is part-time keto.
Many chosing NK claim that their brains run better on ketones than glucose. NK should not be confused with DKA (diabetic ketoacidosis) or starvation ketosis. The eatingacademy site linked earlier has extensive articles about NK, by an MD who has been experimenting on himself with extensive instrumentation.
It might shock the readers of this forum to learn that your government is giving you bad advice :).
Disease trends and healthcare costs are rocketing out of control. People aren’t fat and sick because they aren’t following the official advice, but because they are.
The US advocates a full time high-glycemic diet. The USDA’s MyPlate is 60% of calories from carbs, primarily from grains (which means primarily from wheat, which has massive issues beyond being as glycemic as many sugars). Every other agency defers to MyPlate on diet.
The ideal human macronutrient balance is not yet known, but it appears that carbs need to be more like 5-10% of calories, not 60%.
Sugar feeds cancer. Oncologists use this fact to image it on x-ray, but not to treat it.
Why?
Many pundits will flat out claim that sugar doesn’t just feed cancer, it often causes it. The cancer stats for NK cultures tend to support that, as does a recent paper reported on here:
http://high-fat-nutrition.blogspot.com/2013/06/chowdhury-and-crabtree-play-with.html